Routine wound assessment is an essential aspect of reaching diagnosis and monitoring the effect of dressings and treatment on wound healing, with the initial wound assessment providing baseline information which can be used to draw comparisons against future observations (Schultz et al. 2005). One aspect of the TIME assessment ‘E’- edge of wound, asks the practitioner to record the current maximum, width, depth and length of the wound; wound measurement is crucial for assessing, and providing objective data regarding, the rate and process of healing or deterioration of chronic wounds; in selecting and evaluating treatments; and increasing communication between healthcare professionals (Davis et al. 2013; Jørgensen et al. 2015). Wound area and
…show more content…
2001; Prompers et al. 2008; Treece et al. 2004) with it being suggested that if a wound area hasn’t decreased by at least 40% during the first 4 weeks of treatment, then the chances of complete recovery/healing without changes to the treatment, decrease significantly (Steed et al. 2006). Both Flanagan et al. (2003) and Sheehan et al (2003) suggest that a 40% reduction in wound area after 4 weeks is a good predictor of the wound healing within 12 weeks. With this in mind and with healthcare professionals increasingly expected to validate interventions and give a rationale to support their practice (Davis et al. 2013), it is essential that methods of wound measurement are both valid and reliable. Agreement with other tools, accuracy, feasibility and reliability/consistency of wound measurement tools are central issues in the practical management of wounds and in the development of new treatments, dressings, and care options for a large group of people (Jørgensen et al. 2015). Feasibility refers to how practical a tool is to use for patients and staff, the time required to use a particular tool (O’Meara et al. 2012) and resource utilization (Brazier et al. 1999; Ryan et al. …show more content…
‘Mr Smith’ is a 58 year old male patient; aged 51, ‘Mr Smith’ was diagnosed with diabetic neuropathy and had his right second toe amputated 2 years later due to neuropathic diabetic foot sepsis. Recently, ‘Mr Smith’ developed an inflamed right hallux; he was admitted to hospital as an emergency and the results of an x-ray revealed neuropathic diabetic foot sepsis with osteomyelitis; his right hallux and right third toe were amputated. Following surgery ‘Mr Smith’ was left with a large cavity wound, which although debrided was found to contain Candida, Klebsiella and Ecoli. ‘Mr Smith’ was placed on a wound care integrated pathway of care for his surgical wound which was measured twice weekly, at each dressing change, using a ruler as part of the TIME wound assessment. ‘Mr Smith’s’ wound would be described a chronic as he had a number of underlying factors expected to delay/disrupt the normal healing process- infections, diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, no pedal pulses indicating venous insufficiency to his lower limbs due to critical limb ishchaemia and poor nutritional
2001; Prompers et al. 2008; Treece et al. 2004) with it being suggested that if a wound area hasn’t decreased by at least 40% during the first 4 weeks of treatment, then the chances of complete recovery/healing without changes to the treatment, decrease significantly (Steed et al. 2006). Both Flanagan et al. (2003) and Sheehan et al (2003) suggest that a 40% reduction in wound area after 4 weeks is a good predictor of the wound healing within 12 weeks. With this in mind and with healthcare professionals increasingly expected to validate interventions and give a rationale to support their practice (Davis et al. 2013), it is essential that methods of wound measurement are both valid and reliable. Agreement with other tools, accuracy, feasibility and reliability/consistency of wound measurement tools are central issues in the practical management of wounds and in the development of new treatments, dressings, and care options for a large group of people (Jørgensen et al. 2015). Feasibility refers to how practical a tool is to use for patients and staff, the time required to use a particular tool (O’Meara et al. 2012) and resource utilization (Brazier et al. 1999; Ryan et al. …show more content…
‘Mr Smith’ is a 58 year old male patient; aged 51, ‘Mr Smith’ was diagnosed with diabetic neuropathy and had his right second toe amputated 2 years later due to neuropathic diabetic foot sepsis. Recently, ‘Mr Smith’ developed an inflamed right hallux; he was admitted to hospital as an emergency and the results of an x-ray revealed neuropathic diabetic foot sepsis with osteomyelitis; his right hallux and right third toe were amputated. Following surgery ‘Mr Smith’ was left with a large cavity wound, which although debrided was found to contain Candida, Klebsiella and Ecoli. ‘Mr Smith’ was placed on a wound care integrated pathway of care for his surgical wound which was measured twice weekly, at each dressing change, using a ruler as part of the TIME wound assessment. ‘Mr Smith’s’ wound would be described a chronic as he had a number of underlying factors expected to delay/disrupt the normal healing process- infections, diabetes, diabetic neuropathy, no pedal pulses indicating venous insufficiency to his lower limbs due to critical limb ishchaemia and poor nutritional